this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2025
84 points (96.7% liked)

politics

19293 readers
2419 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Donald Trump has asked the Supreme Court to block his sentencing in New York’s hush money case, scheduled for Friday.

Trump’s legal team argues presidential immunity, citing a recent Supreme Court ruling shielding certain official acts from prosecution, though it excludes personal actions.

Trump was convicted in May on 34 felony counts for falsifying records tied to hush money payments during the 2016 election.

A New York judge ruled that immunity does not apply until Trump is sworn in.

Prosecutors must respond by Thursday morning.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 39 points 1 day ago (13 children)

Why even bother trying to stop it?
The judge has stated started that he intends to sentence him to an unconditional discharge, which means they just close the trial and let him walk out of the courthouse.
It just closes the case and lets him off the hook, delaying sentencing would just keep the trial open.

[–] dogsnest@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (11 children)

As a convicted felon, many countries could refuse him entry.

This would be yet another step in having the entire conviction tossed.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (8 children)

As a convicted felon, many countries could refuse him entry.

No country is going to refuse entry to the President of the United States. I don't care if he committed the Manson family murders.

EDIT: For those who are downvoting me, he's already a convicted felon. Here's a list of countries that would normally deny entry to convicted felons.

Go ahead and let me know when Canada, the UK, Japan, Austrailia, or even China denies Trump entry. Downvotes don't change facts, people. If you're going to downvote, list one country that is going to deny the President of the United States entry because he is a convicted felon. You don't have to like the truth, but downvoting fact-based information doesn't change it.

[–] slothrop@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Would it be rhetorical to ask if you're American?

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why would that matter?

Trump has 34 felony convictions. He is a convicted felon. Which countries are going to deny him entry?

[–] slothrop@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why would it matter?

Because only an American would believe that Trump has the God-like power you've bestowed upon him.

It's sad and pathetic, but explains the SCOTUS prostration.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world -4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Then fine. Prove me wrong. Name one fucking country that is going to deny Donald Trump entry.

Saying that any country is going to refuse entry to Trump is little more than copium.

[–] slothrop@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Like, right now?

China. Prove me wrong.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world -4 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

And when has China denied Trump entry?

[–] slothrop@lemmy.ca 2 points 23 hours ago

Where did I say they did?

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)